1. |
- Broman, K. K., et al.
(author)
-
Active surveillance of patients who have sentinel node positive melanoma: An international, multi-institution evaluation of adoption and early outcomes after the Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy trial II (MSLT-2)
- 2021
-
In: Cancer. - : Wiley. - 0008-543X .- 1097-0142. ; 127:13, s. 2251-2261
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background For patients with sentinel lymph node (SLN)-positive cutaneous melanoma, the Second Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy trial demonstrated equivalent disease-specific survival (DSS) with active surveillance using nodal ultrasound versus completion lymph node dissection (CLND). Adoption and outcomes of active surveillance in clinical practice and in adjuvant therapy recipients are unknown. Methods In a retrospective cohort of SLN-positive adults treated at 21 institutions in Australia, Europe, and the United States from June 2017 to November 2019, the authors evaluated the impact of active surveillance and adjuvant therapy on all-site recurrence-free survival (RFS), isolated nodal RFS, distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and DSS using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazard models. Results Among 6347 SLN biopsies, 1154 (18%) were positive and had initial negative distant staging. In total, 965 patients (84%) received active surveillance, 189 (16%) underwent CLND. Four hundred thirty-nine patients received adjuvant therapy (surveillance, 38%; CLND, 39%), with the majority (83%) receiving anti-PD-1 immunotherapy. After a median follow-up of 11 months, 220 patients developed recurrent disease (surveillance, 19%; CLND, 22%), and 24 died of melanoma (surveillance, 2%; CLND, 4%). Sixty-eight patients had an isolated nodal recurrence (surveillance, 6%; CLND, 4%). In patients who received adjuvant treatment without undergoing prior CLND, all isolated nodal recurrences were resectable. On risk-adjusted multivariable analyses, CLND was associated with improved isolated nodal RFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.36; 95% CI, 0.15-0.88), but not all-site RFS (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.45-1.02). Adjuvant therapy improved all-site RFS (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.47-0.57). DSS and DMFS did not differ by nodal management or adjuvant treatment. Conclusions Active surveillance has been adopted for most SLN-positive patients. At initial assessment, real-world outcomes align with randomized trial findings, including in adjuvant therapy recipients. Lay Summary For patients with melanoma of the skin and microscopic spread to lymph nodes, monitoring with ultrasound is an alternative to surgically removing the remaining lymph nodes. The authors studied adoption and real-world outcomes of ultrasound monitoring in over 1000 patients treated at 21 centers worldwide, finding that most patients now have ultrasounds instead of surgery. Although slightly more patients have cancer return in the lymph nodes with this strategy, typically, it can be removed with delayed surgery. Compared with up-front surgery, ultrasound monitoring results in the same overall risk of melanoma coming back at any location or of dying from melanoma.
|
|
2. |
- Egeler, M.D., et al.
(author)
-
Understanding quality of life issues in patients with advanced melanoma : Phase 1 and 2 in the development of the EORTC advanced melanoma module
- 2024
-
In: European Journal of Cancer. - : Elsevier. - 0959-8049 .- 1879-0852. ; 207
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Aims: We aimed to develop a European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life (QoL) module tailored for patients with advanced (resectable or unresectable stage III/IV) melanoma receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors or targeted therapy.Methods: Following the EORTC QoL Group module development guidelines, we conducted phases 1 and 2 of the development process. In phase 1, we generated a list of health-related (HR)QoL issues through a systematic literature review and semi-structured interviews with healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients with advanced melanoma. In phase 2, these issues were converted into questionnaire items to create the preliminary module.Results: Phase 1: we retrieved 8006 articles for the literature review, of which 35 were deemed relevant, resulting in 84 HRQoL issues being extracted to create the initial issue list. Semi-structured interviews with 18 HCPs and 28 patients with advanced melanoma resulted in 28 issues being added to the initial issue list. Following EORTC module development criteria, 26 issues were removed, and two issues were added after review by patient advocates.Phase 2: To ensure uniformity and avoid duplication, 16 issues were consolidated into eight items. Additionally, an independent expert contributed one new item, resulting in a preliminary module comprising 80 HRQoL items.Conclusion: We identified a range of HRQoL issues (dry skin, xerostomia, and arthralgia) relevant to patients with stage III/IV melanoma. Future module development phases will refine the questionnaire. Once completed, this module will enable standardized assessment of HRQoL in patients with (locally) advanced melanoma.
|
|
3. |
- Broman, K. K., et al.
(author)
-
Surveillance of Sentinel Node-Positive Melanoma Patients with Reasons for Exclusion from MSLT-II: Multi-Institutional Propensity Score Matched Analysis
- 2021
-
In: Journal of the American College of Surgeons. - : Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health). - 1072-7515. ; 232:4, s. 424-431
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: In sentinel lymph node (SLN)-positive melanoma, two randomized trials demonstrated equivalent melanoma-specific survival with nodal surveillance vs completion lymph node dissection (CLND). Patients with microsatellites, extranodal extension (ENE) in the SLN, or >3 positive SLNs constitute a high-risk group largely excluded from the randomized trials, for whom appropriate management remains unknown. STUDY DESIGN: SLN-positive patients with any of the three high-risk features were identified from an international cohort. CLND patients were matched 1:1 with surveillance patients using propensity scores. Risk of any-site recurrence, SLN-basin-only recurrence, and melanoma specific mortality were compared. RESULTS: Among 1,154 SLN-positive patients, 166 had ENE, microsatellites, and/or >3 positive SLN. At 18.5 months median follow-up, 49% had recurrence (vs 26% in patients without high-risk features, p < 0.01). Among high-risk patients, 52 (31%) underwent CLND and 114 (69%) received surveillance. Fifty-one CLND patients were matched to 51 surveillance patients. The matched cohort was balanced on tumor, nodal, and adjuvant treatment factors. There were no significant differences in any-site recurrence (CLND 49%, surveillance 45%, p = 0.99), SLN-basin-only recurrence (CLND 6%, surveillance 14%, p = 0.20), or melanoma-specific mortality (CLND 14%, surveillance 12%, p = 0.86). CONCLUSIONS: SLN-positive patients with microsatellites, ENE, or >3 positive SLN constitute a high-risk group with a 2-fold greater recurrence risk. For those managed with nodal surveillance, SLN-basin recurrences were more frequent, but all-site recurrence and melanoma-specific mortality were comparable to patients treated with CLND. Most recurrences were outside the SLN-basin, supporting use of nodal surveillance for SLN-positive patients with microsatellites, ENE, and/or >3 positive SLN. Crown Copyright (C) 2020 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of the American College of Surgeons. All rights reserved.
|
|
4. |
- de Boniface, J., et al.
(author)
-
Omitting axillary dissection in breast cancer with sentinel-node metastases
- 2024
-
In: New England Journal of Medicine. - 0028-4793 .- 1533-4406. ; 390:13, s. 1163-1175
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND Trials evaluating the omission of completion axillary-lymph-node dissection in patients with clinically node-negative breast cancer and sentinel-lymph-node metastases have been compromised by limited statistical power, uncertain nodal radiotherapy target volumes, and a scarcity of data on relevant clinical subgroups.METHODS We conducted a noninferiority trial in which patients with clinically node-negative primary T1 to T3 breast cancer (tumor size, T1, ≤20 mm; T2, 21 to 50 mm; and T3, >50 mm in the largest dimension) with one or two sentinel-node macrometastases (metastasis size, >2 mm in the largest dimension) were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to completion axillary-lymph-node dissection or its omission (sentinel-node biopsy only). Adjuvant treatment and radiation therapy were used in accordance with national guidelines. The primary end point was overall survival. We report here the per-protocol and modified intention-to-treat analyses of the prespecified secondary end point of recurrence-free survival. To show noninferiority of sentinel-node biopsy only, the upper boundary of the confidence interval for the hazard ratio for recurrence or death had to be below 1.44.RESULTS Between January 2015 and December 2021, a total of 2766 patients were enrolled across five countries. The per-protocol population included 2540 patients, of whom 1335 were assigned to undergo sentinel-node biopsy only and 1205 to undergo completion axillary-lymph-node dissection (dissection group). Radiation therapy including nodal target volumes was administered to 1192 of 1326 patients (89.9%) in the sentinel-node biopsy–only group and to 1058 of 1197 (88.4%) in the dissection group. The median follow-up was 46.8 months (range, 1.5 to 94.5). Overall, 191 patients had recurrence or died. The estimated 5-year recurrence-free survival was 89.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 87.5 to 91.9) in the sentinel-node biopsy–only group and 88.7% (95% CI, 86.3 to 91.1) in the dissection group, with a country-adjusted hazard ratio for recurrence or death of 0.89 (95% CI, 0.66 to 1.19), which was significantly (P<0.001) below the prespecified noninferiority margin.CONCLUSIONS The omission of completion axillary-lymph-node dissection was noninferior to the more extensive surgery in patients with clinically node-negative breast cancer who had sentinel-node macrometastases, most of whom received nodal radiation therapy. (Funded by the Swedish Research Council and others; SENOMAC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02240472.).
|
|
5. |
- Egeler, M. D., et al.
(author)
-
Understanding quality of life issues in patients with advanced melanoma: Phase 1 and 2 in the development of the EORTC advanced melanoma module
- 2024
-
In: European Journal of Cancer. - : Elsevier. - 0959-8049 .- 1879-0852. ; 207
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Aims: We aimed to develop a European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life (QoL) module tailored for patients with advanced (resectable or unresectable stage III/IV) melanoma receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors or targeted therapy. Methods: Following the EORTC QoL Group module development guidelines, we conducted phases 1 and 2 of the development process. In phase 1, we generated a list of health-related (HR)QoL issues through a systematic literature review and semi-structured interviews with healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients with advanced melanoma. In phase 2, these issues were converted into questionnaire items to create the preliminary module. Results: Phase 1: we retrieved 8006 articles for the literature review, of which 35 were deemed relevant, resulting in 84 HRQoL issues being extracted to create the initial issue list. Semi-structured interviews with 18 HCPs and 28 patients with advanced melanoma resulted in 28 issues being added to the initial issue list. Following EORTC module development criteria, 26 issues were removed, and two issues were added after review by patient advocates. Phase 2: To ensure uniformity and avoid duplication, 16 issues were consolidated into eight items. Additionally, an independent expert contributed one new item, resulting in a preliminary module comprising 80 HRQoL items. Conclusion: We identified a range of HRQoL issues (dry skin, xerostomia, and arthralgia) relevant to patients with stage III/IV melanoma. Future module development phases will refine the questionnaire. Once completed, this module will enable standardized assessment of HRQoL in patients with (locally) advanced melanoma.
|
|
6. |
- Karakatsanis, Andreas, et al.
(author)
-
SentiNot : A way to avoid sentinel node biopsy (SNB) in patients with a preoperative diagnosis of ductal cancer in situ (DCIS)
- 2017
-
In: Cancer Research. - Univ Uppsala Hosp, Sect Endocrine & Breast Surg, Uppsala, Sweden. Univ Uppsala Hosp, Uppsala, Sweden. Vastmanland Cty Hosp, Vasteras, Vasteras, Sweden. Uppsala Clin Res Ctr, Uppsala, Sweden. Kalmar Cty Hosp, Sect Breast Surg, Kalmar, Sweden. Univ Uppsala Hosp, Inst Radiol Oncol & Radiotherapy, Uppsala, Sweden. Norrlands Univ Hosp, Umea, Sweden. : AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH. - 0008-5472 .- 1538-7445. ; 77
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)
|
|
7. |
- Lunavat, Taral R, et al.
(author)
-
BRAF(V600) inhibition alters the microRNA cargo in the vesicular secretome of malignant melanoma cells
- 2017
-
In: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. - : Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. - 0027-8424. ; 114:29
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The BRAF inhibitors vemurafenib and dabrafenib can be used to treat patients with metastatic melanomas harboring BRAF(V600) mutations. Initial antitumoral responses are often seen, but drug-resistant clones with reactivation of the MEK-ERK pathway soon appear. Recently, the secretome of tumor-derived extracellular vesicles (EVs) has been ascribed important functions in cancers. To elucidate the possible functions of EVs in BRAF-mutant melanoma, we determined the RNA content of the EVs, including apoptotic bodies, microvesicles, and exosomes, released from such cancer cells after vemurafenib treatment. We found that vemurafenib significantly increased the total RNA and protein content of the released EVs and caused significant changes in the RNA profiles. RNA sequencing and quantitative PCR show that cells and EVs from vemurafenib-treated cell cultures and tumor tissues harvested from cell-derived and patient-derived xenografts harbor unique miRNAs, especially increased expression of miR-211-5p. Mechanistically, the expression of miR-211-5p as a result of BRAF inhibition was induced by increased expression of MITF that regulates the TRPM1 gene resulting in activation of the survival pathway. In addition, transfection of miR-211 in melanoma cells reduced the sensitivity to vemurafenib treatment, whereas miR-211-5p inhibition in a vemurafenib resistant cell line affected the proliferation negatively. Taken together, our results show that vemurafenib treatment induces miR-211-5p up-regulation in melanoma cells both in vitro and in vivo, as well as in subsets of EVs, suggesting that EVs may provide a tool to understand malignant melanoma progression.
|
|
8. |
- Bagge, R. Olofsson, et al.
(author)
-
A phase Ib randomized multicenter trial of isolated hepatic perfusion in combination with ipilimumab and nivolumab for uveal melanoma metastases (SCANDIUM II trial)
- 2024
-
In: ESMO Open. - : Elsevier. - 2059-7029. ; 9:7
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background:Uveal melanoma (UM) is a rare malignancy where 50% of patients develop metastatic disease primarily affecting the liver. Approximately 40% of patients with metastatic UM respond to one-time isolated hepatic perfusion (IHP) with high -dose melphalan. This phase I trial investigates the safety and clinical ef fi cacy of IHP combined with ipilimumab (IPI) and nivolumab (NIVO).Patients and methods:Immunotherapy-na & iuml;ve patients were randomized in this phase I trial to receive either IHP followed by IPI 3 mg/kg and NIVO 1 mg/kg (IPI3/NIVO1) for four cycles (post -operative arm), or one cycle of preoperative IPI3/NIVO1, IHP and then three cycles of IPI3/NIVO1 (pre-post-operative arm), followed by maintenance therapy with NIVO 480 mg for 1 year.Results:Eighteen patients were enrolled and randomized. Three patients did not undergo IHP as planned. In total, 11/ 18 patients (6 in the post -operative arm and 5 in the pre-post-operative arm) did not complete the planned four cycles of IPI3/NIVO1. Toxicity to IHP was similar in both groups, but the number of immune-related adverse events (AEs) was higher in the pre-post-operative arm. Among assessable patients, overall response rate was 57% in the post -operative arm (4/7) and 22% in the pre-post-operative arm (2/9).Conclusions:Combination therapy with IHP and IPI3/NIVO1 was associated with severe AEs. The efficacy of this combination is encouraging with high response rates. One cycle of preoperative IPI/NIVO before IHP did not show potential benefits in terms of safety or efficacy.
|
|
9. |
|
|
10. |
- Bagge, Roger Olofsson, et al.
(author)
-
Population-Based Validation of the MIA and MSKCC Tools for Predicting Sentinel Lymph Node Status
- 2024
-
In: JAMA Surgery. - : AMER MEDICAL ASSOC. - 2168-6254 .- 2168-6262.
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Importance Patients with melanoma are selected for sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) based on their risk of a positive SLN. To improve selection, the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) and Melanoma Institute Australia (MIA) developed predictive models, but the utility of these models remains to be tested.Objective To determine the clinical utility of the MIA and MSKCC models.Design, Setting, and Participants This was a population-based comparative effectiveness research study including 10 089 consecutive patients with cutaneous melanoma undergoing SLNB from the Swedish Melanoma Registry from January 2007 to December 2021. Data were analyzed from May to August 2023.Main Outcomes and Measures, The predicted probability of SLN positivity was calculated using the MSKCC model and a limited MIA model (using mitotic rate as absent/present instead of count/mm(2) and excluding the optional variable lymphovascular invasion) for each patient. The operating characteristics of the models were assessed and compared. The clinical utility of each model was assessed using decision curve analysis and compared with a strategy of performing SLNB on all patients.Results Among 10 089 included patients, the median (IQR) age was 64.0 (52.0-73.0) years, and 5340 (52.9%) were male. The median Breslow thickness was 1.8 mm, and 1802 patients (17.9%) had a positive SLN. Both models were well calibrated across the full range of predicted probabilities and had similar external area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC; MSKCC: 70.8%; 95% CI, 69.5-72.1 and limited MIA: 69.7%; 95% CI, 68.4-71.1). At a risk threshold of 5%, decision curve analysis indicated no added net benefit for either model compared to performing SLNB for all patients. At risk thresholds of 10% or higher, both models added net benefit compared to SLNB for all patients. The greatest benefit was observed in patients with T2 melanomas using a threshold of 10%; in that setting, the use of the nomograms led to a net reduction of 8 avoidable SLNBs per 100 patients for the MSKCC nomogram and 7 per 100 patients for the limited MIA nomogram compared to a strategy of SLNB for all.Conclusions and Relevance This study confirmed the statistical performance of both the MSKCC and limited MIA models in a large, nationally representative data set. However, decision curve analysis demonstrated that using the models only improved selection for SLNB compared to biopsy in all patients when a risk threshold of at least 7% was used, with the greatest benefit seen for T2 melanomas at a threshold of 10%. Care should be taken when using these nomograms to guide selection for SLNB at the lowest thresholds.
|
|